> I've noticed that no teams, participants, or anybodys profile shows credit. Is
> this because no credit has been issued yet, or the databases are not ready?
>
Thsi is because it takes at least 3 users to return the same workunit you are crunching for any credit to be granted. It is not like in Seti Classic.
Partly to stop the cheating(suspected) and partly to help validate the results.
If the units are returned by the "report deadline" date in Boinc under "work" tab, then it is sent out to more computers until 3 similar results come back. Similar being numbers near to each other, 50 from yours , 52 from another computer and 54 from still another. 300 from yours and 50 from the other 2 is NOT similiar.

> If the units are returned by the "report deadline" date in Boinc under "work"
> tab, then it is sent out to more computers until 3 similar results come back.
> Similar being numbers near to each other, 50 from yours , 52 from another
> computer and 54 from still another. 300 from yours and 50 from the other 2 is
> NOT similiar.

That's not it at all. It's the actual content of the results that needs to be verified, not the amount of credit given to the hosts that processed it. It does this to ensure the science value of the WU is valid. If your host returns a different result than the other two hosts, it will be flagged as invalid, and your WU will be sent to another host. This is one of the new features that make BOINC superior to S@H1.

And as for the credit, the system is functioning now, and there are credits on the board.

> And as for the credit, the system is functioning now, and there are credits on
> the board.
> ==========
>
> Yes, but some of the credits are totally screwed up Heff. Some of the people
> only have 1 WU turned in but have 25-28 Recent credits already...D'oh

First off; patience.

Second, in the early days, it will take awhile to get the credit system rolling. Alot of factors affect how you get credits.

For those who already have alot, they are in fact lucky that they submitted work units where the other results were similar and done quickly. If you are unlucky in the beginning, you might return quickly, but the other hosts are either slow, having problems or some other factor that delays thier submission.

Another thing that happened alot in beta was that people had problems and would reset the project. This meant that if one of the WUs you had finished was affected by another host's reset, you would be waiting weeks for the WU to go out again and hopefully get accepted this time with a good result.

As others have said, after a few weeks, there will be enough users running that you will hardly notice the few WU's that get held up in the "system". Your recent average will not be affected by a few stray WU's unless you only crunch with one old PIII for example. :-)

I am going to add this to the validation definition, could not have said it better ...

> That's not it at all. It's the actual content of the results that needs to be
> verified, not the amount of credit given to the hosts that processed
> it. It does this to ensure the science value of the WU is valid. If your host
> returns a different result than the other two hosts, it will be flagged as
> invalid, and your WU will be sent to another host. This is one of the new
> features that make BOINC superior to S@H1.
>
> And as for the credit, the system is functioning now, and there are credits on
> the board.
>

Funny how the team I am crunching for (PC Format) is in the top team list, yet if you look for who got the credits, the team list is still saying we're all at 0 credits. Oh well, it wasn't me anyway. And I am not checking through 600 pages for who it may be (1265 members...) ;)

> I am going to add this to the validation definition, could not have said it
> better ...

Paul,

Not pertinent to this thread, but there is some info you may also want to look at here - http://setiboinc.ssl.berkeley.edu/sah/forum_thread.php?id=171 - concerning a possible error with the info in the faq about setting up a proxy in linux.

I sent someone to it, but it didn't work the way the faq says. They posted back what they got to work, and I suggested they email you, but just in case they don't you can see it here.

> I'm confused because ALL my WU but one have ranged between 20-30 credits per
> workunit. So why would it be strange for someone with one WU to have 25-28
> credits?
==========

There's nothing strange about having 25-28 Total Credits for 1 WU, but when they have 35 Recent Credits for that 1 Work Unit then it's strange...

You will find that your Recent Credit will lag far behind your total Credit as time goes on. Your Recent Credit can also go up or down depending on how much work you turn in. Where as your Total Credit will never go down, it will only go up & it should never be less than your Recent Credit...

>
> > I am going to add this to the validation definition, could not have said
> it
> > better ...
>
> Paul,
>
> Not pertinent to this thread, but there is some info you may also want to look
> at here - http://setiboinc.ssl.berkeley.edu/sah/forum_thread.php?id=171 -
> concerning a possible error with the info in the faq about setting up a proxy
> in linux.
>
> I sent someone to it, but it didn't work the way the faq says. They posted
> back what they got to work, and I suggested they email you, but just in case
> they don't you can see it here.

I will go look, since I have no linux machines and I don't like the maintenance of the command line clients I am weak in those areas, so ... I am not surprised... Mac is also weak (tho I DO have one of those, the last time I tried to install BOINC I spent an hour trying to find all the pieces of my blown up directories...)

> > I'm confused because ALL my WU but one have ranged between 20-30 credits
> per
> > workunit. So why would it be strange for someone with one WU to have
> 25-28
> > credits?
> ==========
>
> There's nothing strange about having 25-28 Total Credits for 1 WU, but when
> they have 35 Recent Credits for that 1 Work Unit then it's strange...
>
> You will find that your Recent Credit will lag far behind your total Credit as
> time goes on. Your Recent Credit can also go up or down depending on how much
> work you turn in. Where as your Total Credit will never go down, it will only
> go up & it should never be less than your Recent Credit...
>
>
Rectent credit is based on the exponentially reducing average of credit granted in the last week. However, there is a glitch at startup since the time for the average is less than a week, the credit granted can be below the credit average. This is expected behavour.
jm7